A reasoned argument that just brings you back to the same conclusion - there's nowt wrong with it other than it p****s off hetero, goody-two-shoed, narrow-minded, biggots.

>I don't get it. Still, I have absolutely no problem with gay marriage because it doesn't take any rights or freedoms away from me. The only thing it does do, IMHO, is to afford the same legal rights as any heterosexual couple.
>
>Having written that, I imagine insurance companies are having a field day. The biggest fear of gay marriages is probably not overzealous religious groups fearing the errosion of mankind, but in fact insurance companies fearing any two people could go get married and have all the legal rights (which includes insurance benefits) of a married couple. If your friend is sick - just marry him. Then your insurance can pay for his medical bills. If your friend is dying - just marry him. Then you can collect the inheritance. Of course the same thing has always been the case for people of the opposite sex. I know of a few couples who stayed married only so they could keep the insurance benefits of the other because one of them became seriously ill.
>
>>>I don't think the civil right movement and gay marriage thing is exactly the same thing.
>>
>>But it is. It's all about discrimination. It's all about making them second-class citizens, just as people of color and slaves were once. You are of asian ancestry. Luckily you live in an age where you can walk the streets, and hold a job, just like everybody else. That was not so in the past, where you would have been discriminated based on your skin and ancestry. Why is it OK to discriminate based on sexual preference?
>>
>>Let's not mix secular law of the land with your particular religious views. What a certain religion has to say about gays access to a marriage certificate, with the legal benefits that entails (inheritance, tax breaks, etc.) has nothing to do with what the law says/should say in this country (and apparently also in S.Africa - good for them).